Measuring in aDecohering Environment

(Trigger-Physics/physics-of-

triggering.pdf)

Inspections in a Decohering Environment

“Around the Electronic Inspectors the decisive factor and most oftenoverlooked: the Environment"

IntroductionThe animation shows the fine-details of how a measurement happens. Specifically shown whathappens to a macroscopic System (a cat), initially in a superposition of states, under the effectof the same Environment in standard conditions of temperature, pressure and humidity wherealso all Food and Beverage Controls operate. It is, visibly, a smooth continous process. Displayed the reconstructed Wigner function of the System averaged over 4 ms, reconstructedwith the data recorded in a 4 ms sliding time-window (credit CNRS, Laboratoire KastlerBrossel).

Two different phenomena are visible:

Graphene Service and Integration of Bottling Controls® SITEMAP TERMS

ABOUT US DEVELOPERS' PORTAL TECHNOLOGY SERVING BOTTLING OUR REFERENCES PRICE LIST

116 pages, 33 MB (Trigger-Physics/physics-of-triggering.pdf)

Below: the Environment causallyconnected with our Bottling Controlsis wider than the Factory in whichthey operate. An entire Food andBeverage Bottling Line can bestopped by the false rejects whoseunique - 8.5 minutes delayed - causelies 150 millions of kilometres afar:the Sun. But, also apart the limitcase here described, sun beams actconstantly in the productive process,creating a daily cycle causingapparent spontaneoussensibilisations of the BottlingControls’ inspections and theopposite effect around twelve hourslater

a fast decay of the quantum interference feature, in the few initial milliseconds;a much slower evolution of the classical components towards phase-space origin.

In the following, it’ll become more clear how deeply and constantly these modern subjectsintervene in the function of the Electronic Inspectors and their measurements (inspections).

Along past three decades Decoherence explained why:

certain microscopic objects, commonly named “ articles", seem to be localized in space:in the reality, particles do not exist and only there are waves (see figure on right side); microscopic systems are usually found in their energy eigenstates and therefore seem tojump between them, meaning that there are no quantum jumps;they appeared to exist two contradictory levels of description in physics (classical andquantum) when there is a single framework for all physical theories: the quantum theory;the Schrödinger equation of General Relativity (also named Wheeler-DeWitt equation)born in 1967 may describe the appearance of Time in spite of being Time-less. It hasbeen understood that Time does not exist and what it really exists is an arrow of time inthe form of a special initial condition.

Electronic Inspection and Quantum Physics: a common groundInspections can be imagined as finalised measurements or measurements with a scope.Physical measurements are the core of Bottling Controls Technology and operation. Aroundthe Electronic Inspector there is the decisive factor, and most often overlooked: theEnvironment. Electronic Inspectors (or, Bottling Controls) in Food and Beverage productionLines are collections of assembles, named inspections, whose components are Optoelectronicdevices performing physical measurements of the properties of objects (containers, crates,cases, etc.) and their content, mainly by mean of electromagnetic measurements. In thisframework, Triggers are the most basic devices, those controlling the successive actions ofphysical measurement and eventual rejection in a Binary Classifier. A physical measurementrequires a collection of devices in our case clock systems integrated in the Inspector’selectronics, Encoders, counters, LASER photosensors, CMOS-cameras, High Frequencyresidual liquid controls, and so on. The operational control of this instrumentation is exercisedin the phase of the Inspector startup and commissioning by the field Engineer, who programcontractual agreements about what to measure, how to perform a measurement, and how tointerpret the results.

Environment, the measurements' “domain”The Food and Beverage Bottling Line covers a finite spatial volume and the measurements lastfor a finite interval of time, in our case commonly ranging: (0.1 - 20) ms. In general, it is definedas the measurement’s “domain" the space-time region in which a process of measurement takes place. The Sun (see figures on rightside) is capable to repeatedly stop along tens of minutes an entire Beverage Bottling Line. How ? In its most natural way, by mean ofbeams of light which are one of the two known causative relations (the second being gravitons) between the measurementsaccomplished in our Factories here and now, and that object 149.5 millions of kilometer afar and ~8.5 minutes ago.

We’ll cite four different examples, all of them referred to our specific field of application, automatised Quality Controls in the Food andBeverage Bottling Lines:

1. photons in the visible part of the spectrum, due to reflections into Inspectors’ mirrors are later amplified, forcing massive falserejects (> 40 %) in Full Bottle and Empty Bottle Inspectors equipped with Vision cameras;

Below: the smallest and strictlycausally connected Environment is ahuge sphere, centered in the Factory,whose volume is 1.4 * 10 km

2. photons in the visible part of the spectrum, in feedingcap Colour tri-chromatic sensors and later amplified,emulate caps of wrong colour, forcing massive falserejects (> 10 %) in Full Bottle Bottle Inspectorsequipped with cap Colour inspection;

3. thermal photons act on beverage characteristiccreating a diurnal cycle. A beverage whose fill level isbeing inspected with high frequency em radiation,appear apparently underfilled at ~3 PM than at ~5AM. Net effect front of a single sensitivity setup:huge false rejects at ~3 PM;

4. thermal photons act on the PET bottlescharacteristics, creating a diurnal cycle. PETcontainers tension shall be minimised at ~3 PM andmaximised at ~5 AM. A PET container whose sealing(leakage) is inspected by mean of a Squeezer FullBottle Inspector, equipped with inspection forpressure, inductive seal and difference of fill level,shall appear defective at ~3 PM and correctly sealedat ~5 AM.

Classic interpretationReading from the classic Physics point of view the last two of the four cases above, we see acommon cause (written in italics) for the “measurement anomaly":

3. the beverage at ~3 PM cannot be inspected for HF fill level like at ~5 AM, because theEnvironmental conditions are different;

4. the PET container at ~3 PM cannot be inspected for sealing like at ~5 AM, because theEnvironmental conditions are different;

Modern interpretationRe-reading from the modern Physics point of view the last two of the four cases above, it is detected (and, tentatively eliminated)an ambiguity in the Classic Physics point of view, causing approximation:

3. the beverage at ~3 PM cannot be inspected for HF fill level like at ~5 AM, because the correlation between Environment andbeverage is different;

4. the PET container at ~3 PM cannot be inspected for sealing like at ~5 AM, because the correlation between Environment andcontainer (mechanical characteristics) is different.

Out of this sphere, there is the much wider heliosphere where the Sun act also, preventing the dangerous arrival on the Earth surface ofthe majority of atomic nuclei and electrons, flying at relativistic speed and of high energy photons, gamma and X-rays. These all merebyproducts of the multitude of astrophysics events interesting clouds and those gigantic fusion energy-based reactors collectively namedstars. A small portion of them reach however the surface and our Machinery, implying one more reason for the fact that it is unavoidableto experience measurement fluctuations, also in presence of standard cables' shielding. These examples are not simply extending theradius of the spherical space-time region, the “domain” (or, Environment) in which our measurements take place, well out of the assumedperimeter of the Food and Beverage Factories. This, because what really performs the inspection function in the over 100000 ElectronicInspectors into Food and Beverage Bottling Factories, are atoms of Silicium into the billions of transistors, themselves part of IntegratedCircuits processing signals mainly incoming by CMOS- and CCD-cameras. Several stages of amplification, filterings and comparisons ofthese amounts with parameters, are the essence of the inspection process. A process finalised to Binary Classification, typical task for

25 3

Quantum Computers processing qubits rather than bits anda long chain of nonclassic measurement stages.

Tunnel-effect illuminates the way towarda technological breakthrough

A practical example of the many logical and experimentalthreads which carried to this modern scenario, given by thenon-classic quantum mechanical Tunnel-effect discoveredin 1958 by Esaki. On right side an application, the Tunnel-effect diode and, below, its nonlinear characteristic current-voltage curve. The animation below shows the time-evolution of the wave function of the electrons in thoseatoms of Germanium building up this electroniccomponent. Electrons making what Classic Laws ofPhysics considers impossible, passing through a barrierof potential. Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle allowedand made sense of this expected behaviour yet decadesbefore the experimental discovery. What has beendiscovered later that the Tunnelling effect is ...too fast. Thorough testing by several Laboratories, the first ofthem Günter Nimtz, at different frequencies and for different kinds of particles, allowed thedetermination of superluminal speed across the barrier.

Above: evolution of the electron wave function through a potential barrier. The animationrenders what let the Tunnel-effect diode (figures on right side) be so fast with respect to theother components: the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. The central white colour verticalbar is the potential barrier Classic Physics considered impossible to breakthrough. If weassume the video showing a single electron in a single Universe, then frequent superluminalpropagation of the wave function implies paradoxical situations, synthesized in violations ofthe basic postulate of Relativity: the existence of a maximum limit speed. Tunnel-effect diodes are simply 'too fast' to be existing in aunique instance. What seems to cross the barrier five times faster than light is with today a few residual doubts, only an effect of our

Above: Tunnel effectdiodes sport extremely high speed ofoperation, ~ 1 THz (1 terahertzequals 1000 GHz). This results fromthe fact that Tunnel diode only usesmajority carriers, e.g., holes in an N-type material and electrons in a P-type material. The minority carriersslow down the operation of a deviceand, as a result, their speed is slower

Above: the negative differentialresistance of the Tunnel-effect diode,in a current-voltage graph. Thenonlinear and nonclassic feature ofthe diode identified in the redcoloured negative differential electricresistance, base of its impressivespeed performances. The tunnellingeffect is inherently very fast…, toofast when we consider that recentthorough testing has determined

perspective when considering that the electron coexist in several interfering branches of acommon tree-like structure

As an example, the graph below shows two microwave pulses at the same frequency of 8.2GHz travelling through:

(1) air (light violet)

(2) a barrier (dark violet);

the latter traversed the same distance ~ 1 ns faster, a speed 4.7 c, say nearly five times fasterthan light speed in vacuum (299 792 458 m/s). Superluminal if, and only if, the wave packetpropagated is a unique instance existing in a single universe, say the classic point of view ofthe Special and General Relativity theories, dated 1905-1915. On the opposite, no violation atall of Relativity (no superluminal propagation) if what we are integrating intoour measurement are a multitude of superimposed instances of the same object withmultiversal existence in several mutually interfering branches.

On left side: Tunnel-effect hints to aninterpretation of the events describedby the Quantum Field Theory. In theexample on left side, photons crossingair (1) or a barrier (2). When crossingthe barrier they reach the oppositeside ~ 1 ns before those whichcrossed the air, say 4.7 times fasterthan the maximum speed of light invacuum postulated by Relativity

Each one instance of the same object in a slightly different Environment what, afterDecoherence discovery, is the modern meaning for World.

Wave packets which, because of the:

Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle; linearity of the Quantum Mechanics wave functions which let the semiconductors switchand amplify;

are irreducibly superimposed multiversal objects, behaving dependently of what is happeningelsewhere. Tunnel-effect can only be understood within the nonclassic point of view ofQuantum Mechanics where, like a dam, the Uncertainty Principle separates Classic andModern ideas we have about the physical world.

Several confirmationsThe concept of propagation speed makes sense if Time exists as a fundamental, because theconcept of Speed derivates by those of Space and Time. Then, the conundrum is Time. Wesaw elsewhere the General Relativity assumption about the time-ordered sequence ofsubmanifolds (slices or, leaves, of the manifold M ) constituting a Foliation, whose details andproperties we examined here. (Trigger-Physics/index.html) In this framework, what clocksmeasure is proper time s along their own worldline γ, maintaining coherence with the GeneralCovariance Principle over which Relativity theory is based.

superluminal speed. Superluminal if,and only if, the object is a uniqueinstance existing in a single world

Above: Nimtz and Stahlhofen doubleprism experiment of 2006. Photonscan be detected behind the right-hand prism until the gap exceeds upto about one meter (Jochen Magnus,2011)

Above: prof. Günter Nimtz. Hisimpressive breakthroughs areconfirmed by an amount of other

In 1967 the Wheeler-DeWitt equation was capable to join General Relativity and QuantumMechanics:

and, what is truly relevant, without any reference to the Time. How ? In brief, the Ψ termabove is the superposition of all of the elemental wave functions related to all of the existingwave packets. More, from the point of view of that superposition, no time evolution exists atall. On the opposite, correlated sets of wave packets part of the superposition witness theinitial condition effect historically named Time.

In 1983 Don Page and W. Wootters showed how entangled particles could be used in aQuantum Physics test, to see that the time-ordered sequencing (of the relativistic spatialfoliation M) is in the reality only felt by objects correlated with others because of Entanglement.

Entangled couples of particles:

have notoriously one of their properties strictly related and are unrelated to theEnvironment, until a measurement is accomplished on one of them by a third party or theEnvironmental Decoherence prevails;also when widely separated in the 4-D ordinary space-time, they continue to share thesame small Hilbert space;are explicitly cited by the Relative State formulation of Quantum Mechanics.

Objects related to the Environment feel the effects of Time: Thermodynamics being a relevantexample. The experiment thinked by Page and Wootters involves Entangled photons. It hadbeen first time executed along 2013 by a multinational team guided by Ekaterina Moreva. Thefigure below shows the Optoelectronics layout of the test, including beam splitters, lenses,filters, plates and LASER light commonly adopted into camera-equipped Electronic Inspectors. It has allowed to form an entangled state of the polarization of two photons, one of which isused as a clock to gauge the evolution of the second:

an "internal” Observer that becomes correlated with the clock photon sees the othersystem evolve;an “external" Observer that only observes global properties of the two photons can proveit is static.

independent experimentsand theories, before and after hisown. Some of them, of Bell-Aspecttype about Entanglement, verifieduntil 30 σ, thirty standard deviations !(image abridged by Jochen Magnus,2011)

"Time is an emergent property,deriving from quantumcorrelations and not afundamental of Physics”

Above: layout of the Optoelectronics allowing to form an entangled state of the polarization of two photons, one of which isused as a clock to gauge the evolution of the second. To an "internal” Observer that becomes correlated with the clock

photon the other system appears in evolution, while to an “external" Observer that only observes global properties of the twophotons, it looks static (figure credit Moreva, et al., 2013)

The recently published results confirm the analysis given in 1983 by Page and Wootters: Timeis an emergent property, deriving from quantum correlations (namely, Entanglement), andnot a fundamental of Physics. Then, now that it is established on the dual theoretical andexperimental base that Time is a derived concept of Physics, the superluminal speed of theexperiments developed on Tunnel-effect, has to be moved from the paradox rank to that of unavoidable effect. We cannot calculate any speed, where no Time evolution exists.

Following the Quantum Theory of Measurement, each one time a "goodmeasurement” happens, a correlation between two systems and respective wave functions, anew history branches itself out of the others. This process, introduced by Everett (1957), lateradopted by many eminent physicists.

The term Multiverse has no relationwith the known "Parallel Universes”,made popular by Science-Fiction.“Parallel" means not interacting orambients causally disconnected, sayno exchange at all of Signals andEnergy. Multiverse is nearly theopposite: a superposition of all of themutually interfering wave packets,corresponding to the wave functionsof all objects. Renamed “Multiverse”to mark the conceptual difference. A tree-like structure from our point ofview. A multiply-connected object, asseen by Topology point of view. Several coexisting instances of eachone object, each one part of a slightlydifferent (δ = 1 bit) Environment.

Between them, the nobelists:

Richard Feynman, Stephen Weinberg, Alan Guth, Murray Gell-Mann,

and also some of the most brilliant minds of Physics like:

David Deutsch,James Hartle, John A. Wheeler, Stephen Hawking, Leonard Susskind, Lev Vaidman, Avshalom Elitzur, Yakir Aharonov, Dieter Zeh.

The idea clearly explained in DeWitt (2004, pages 138-144). That’s why no violation of the lightlimit speed c exists in the Tunnel-effect: the new Events are observed along a new branch, anew history, and no referral to prior measurements and results make sense to apply. Since twodecades this is the mechanism conceived underlying correlations superior to 30 σ (thirtystandard deviations !) in the worldwide Bell-Aspect experiments studying Entanglement. Also,others explained decades ago on the base of Everett, 1957 (in eds. DeWitt, 1973) how thismechanism effectively prevents causal violations effects of an hypothetical topologic structurelike the Einstein-Rosen bridge (also known as wormholes), whose existence is not forbidden byGeneral Relativity, from creating paradoxical causal violations. Doing this, Quantum Mechanicsis today backing General Relativity coherence, showing that these extremal scenarios ofanother theory are not in contradiction with its basic assumptions. Entanglement idea derivesby what in 1935 Einstein, Podolski and Rosen figured what at first sight appeared as a flaw intoQuantum Mechanics, one proving at least its incompleteness. It later resulted that the single-world classic point of view of General Relativity is an approximation. Each “goodmeasurement” establishes a new additional thread along the sum of all of the yet existinghistories. In this framework of correlated, non-interacting, systems it is explained (see Everett ineds. DeWitt, et al., 1973, pages 78-83) why and how they are implicit consequences of theQuantum Theory of Measurement, however incomprehensible they may appear as seen by theclassic approximation.

The two figures below synthetise the situation:

left side, the modern paradigm, where Time does not exist. Measurements as a naturalprocess continously happening and each possible measurement's result is actual:the starting point of a new branch of the general history;right side, the classic point of view today disproved by theory and experiments. An initialcondition is perceived like Time by apparatuses and Observers into some of thebranches, which are have no information about the content of the other branches of thehistory. Time, in the reality, a proved effect of the Entanglement condition of apparatusesand Observers.

Above: signature of John VonNeumann, who created much of theQuantum logic and terminology

Basic Quantum Terminology

Coherent, typically applied to asystem, in modern Physics is asynonimous of superimposed. In thissense, superimposed (or, coherent)are the orthonormal eigenvectorsconstituting a base for thewave function Ψ, representingan object, however complex ormassive may it be. Then, decoherent means reduced bya measurement to one definitevalue (eigenvalue of the eigenstate),the only one we perceive in themultitude of alternatives.

Eigen means “characteristic".

Eigenstate is the measured state ofsome object possessing quantifiableproperties like position, momentum,energy etc. The state being measuredand described have to be observable(e.g. like the common electromagnetic

Modern Classic

Large scale effects of a change of paradigm about the MeasurementWe saw here that in the Electronic Inspectors, (Trigger-Physics/index.html) the simplestmeasurement subsystems named Triggers are constantly labelling the (or, applying anidentification to) objects to their position in the space-time, coarse graining (enclosing) theminto macroscopic Shifting-Register’s cells. We have shown how an Event can be associated tothe label of a single slice (or, leaf) in a vast foliation. There is no fundamental distinctionbetween measuring devices and other physical systems. What Triggers differentiate are theidentities of the objects. Triggers are the most elementary kind of inspection which can beconceived in a Bottling Control. A measurement is a special case of interaction betweenphysical systems, an interaction which has the property of correlating a quantity in onesubsystem with a quantity in another.

With reference to the formalism of the modern version of the Principle of Superpositionpresented here (Trigger-Physics/hugh-everett-iii-dissertati.pdf), is cleared that an interaction is ameasurement (pages 54-60) if it satisfies three requirements:

the measurement is associated to a fixed interaction H between systems;the measured quantities are the limit of the instantaneous canonical operators, as thetime goes to infinity. Our common measurements subjected to finite times areapproximate and approach exactness as the time of interaction increases indefinitely;if the fixed interaction H is to produce a measurement of A in S by B in S then Hshall never decrease the information in the marginal distribution of A. If H is to create ameasurement of A by correlating it with B, we expect that a knowledge of B shall give usmore information about A than we had before the measurement took place since,otherwise, the measurement would be useless.

The last requirement, on first sight obscure, regards the fact that the interaction H:

cannot decrease the information content of the distribution of the measured object A; has to increase the information we had about A before we accomplished themeasurement;

is the choice which let the conservation of Probability hold true, the only choice which makespossible statistical deductions: Sturm-Liouville Theorem. A classic concept redressed undernew words. Its full comprehension need an aid to intuition, aid which may arrive by thefollowing two figures referred to cases with two and three dimension. In Mechanics and

1 2

measurements of Bottling Controls ),and have a definite value, calledan eigenvalue.

Eigenfunction of a linear operator,defined on some function space, isany non-zero function in that spacethat returns from the operator exactlyas is, except for a multiplicativescaling factor.

On left side: evolution of a definedvolume Γ(t) in the phase space. Theregion Γ(t) represents the informationwe have about a system at threedistinct and successive times t = 1, 2,3. Visibly, the information we havedoes not increase. Liouville’sTheorem holds its full validity,included those mesoscopic andmacroscopic space-time scaleswhere the Optoelectronic devices inthe Electronic Inspectors aresensible (abridged by imageSusskind, 2005)

On left side: Time t evolution of aregion x. y(t, x) is their Liouvillefunction. The spreading of theLiouville function with time madeevident by the fact that the graphic isnot monometric: 1 cm on the y axeequals 4 on the x axe. Liouvillefunction and its underlying conceptsregarding the phase-space operateswherever: we’ll encounter it again asa useful tool to evaluate what rejects'rates may be expected afterchanging an inspection's sensitivity,given initial conditions

Thermodynamics there is a precise signification when saying that Information is never lost by aclosed system. Please refer to the two figures below, showing in two and three dimensionsthe time evolution of a defined volume in the phase space. The volume of the region Γ(t)represents the information we have about a system at three successive times t = 1, 2, 3. Visibly, the information does not increase. Sturm-Liouville’s Theorem holds its full validity alsoin those mesoscopic and macroscopic space-time scales where the Optoelectronic devices inthe Electronic Inspectors are sensible.

This is the origin of the third constrain appearing above, about the fact that Information cannotdecrease in A but has to increase the Information we had about A before the measurement; onpractice the origin of the Second Principle of Thermodynamics.

Mesoscopic scale: an arena for experimental verifications

In 2010 they started to be spot objects of the size of a visible hair (~ 0.1 mm) existing in twoseparate places, whose separation was measured with a scanning electron microscope. Along2012 it has been first time experimentally detected one more counter intuitive result, yetenvisaged by Quantum Mechanics: LASER photons spontaneously jumping back, rather thanproceeding forward in a crystal lattice.

Above: the setup used in 2001 by Zeilinger et al. which allowed to verify that also macromolecules entails fully their properties in thenon-classic domain of Quantum Mechanics and respect the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. Fullerene C70, is an allotropic form ofCarbonium 70 atoms (figure abridged by Zeilinger, et al., 2001)

Above: close up on the molecule of Fullerene C60, an allotropic form of Carbonium with 60 atoms. Visible the isosurfaces ofground state electron density. Discovered in 1990, was the first used after 1993 to test Decoherence in the mesoscopic scaleof dimensions. The Van der Waals diameter of the molecule C60, accounting also for the thickness of the electronic clouds

around nuclei, is 1 nm

And this, not in the atomic or subatomic realm where Quantum Mechanics was only supposedto act. Rather, on the same mesoscopic scale of the semiconductors’ junctions part of thephototransistors of which are equipped nearly all of the photo-sensors used as Triggers by themost Beverage Bottling Controls. A new paradigm is arising, one whose powerful fruits arecommercial applications as different as the Quantum Computers, simultaneously parallelprocessing in several other Universes, now used by companies like Google, Inc. or Lockeed-Martin Corp. and academic researches sponsored by the Society of Lloyd’s yet in 2007. Whythese private companies should be investing money in something, at first sight,seemingly theoretical ? The answer is in some way related to the discovery of Decoherence.

Above: mesoscopic scale ofdimensions. Tungsten individualatoms directly sighted in this imageobtained in 2008 of the tip of thesharpest Tungsten needle existing.The small central red colour dot is anatom: ~0.30 nm its visible diameter.The image was obtained by mean ofa Field Ion Microscope. Brighter redcolour lines are an effect of smearingdue to atoms' displacements alongthe 1 second long exposure (imageabridged by Silverman, 2008)

Close-up on Decoherence"Decoherence: process that classicalizes a quantum phenomenon, so that its former wavy characterdisappears"

Triggered Events lie in the space-time and energy boundaries separating the fields of applica-tion of Classic and Quantum Physics. We all agree that macroscopic objects are composed ofcollections of microscopic, like molecules and atoms. As a consequence, Triggered Events arefinely rooted there, in the microscopic scale of distances. But, we all are convinced tosee individual Events referred to individual Objects. The Objects to whom we are referring beingalways and only human-, space-, time- and energy-proportioned objects.

No one, in absence of instruments, is capable to discern:

grains of dust whose diameter is < 0.01 mm;Events separated by a time interval < 0.001 s;radiant energy < 0.1 nJ;

because our eyes, and the neuronal system supporting their function, are not biologically deve-loped for that. But, in the end, these limits does not matter that much. Since 1985 theyare known the factors which let the multitudes of paths above described, fruit of Feynman’s own intuition, be reduced to the individual alternative we are experiencing. An introductorydefinition for this modern concept is the process that classicalizes a quantum phenomenon, sothat its former wavy character disappears. Decoherence is the theory of universalEntanglement: it does not describe a distortion of the system by the Environment, but rathera change of state of the Environment by the system. The Environment includes a multitude ofair molecules and photons, mainly at thermal frequencies. Imagine a macroscopic body asmassive as a Bowling Ball like that in one of the figures below, on right side. In this case,scattering of photons or atoms off such a macroscopic object, even very small dust particles ormacromolecules, causes no recoil. But, this inefficiency in the measurement results overcompensated by the multitude of scattering Events, occurring in our daily life and industrialEnvironmental conditions, even along small time intervals, say:

atmospheric pressure: ~1 bar;temperature: (-30 - 60) °C;relative humidity: (0 - 100) %.

Young’s experiment with and without air The two figures below representing the Young double-slit experiment with and withoutmolecules of gas (air), interposed along the paths of electrons.

Two completely different distributions of the hits counted on the following screen:

1. on left side, in a vacuum;2. on right side, with the gas molecules of air.

Decoherence is what impedes us to see all objects in their superimposed reality. It is mainlydue to the collisions between the molecules of air and the electronic clouds around each oneatom. These collisions carry away the phase correlations between the histories where theelectron arrived at several other points. The next two section shall detail what is detected withand without interposed gas. It’ll be accounted how Decoherence phenomenon, discovered in1970, was hiding the direct sight of the true constantly happening behaviour of the matter andradiation, first detected only in 1989.

Above: Thomas Young's double-slit experiment, on left side in vacuum and on right side with air along the paths of electronsemitted by lamp filaments. Counting the hits on the screen, two completely different distributions arise, a diffrence due toDecoherence. Decoherence is mainly due to the collisions between molecules of gas and the electron, carrying away the phasecorrelations between the histories where the electron arrived at point y on the screen by passing through the L slit by those historieswhere the electron arrived at point y on the screen passing through the U slit

1. Double-slit in a VacuumMany of the ideas about the concepts of measurement, space, matter and radiation intotoday’s academic journals originate by ideas published or however circulating decades ago. There are reasons why this is happening. No theory can ignore the experimental evidencesand these last are constantly improved. And, there are some special experiments, like ThomasYoung’s, first accomplished centuries ago and providing some strong clues about theeverything reality, which had to wait centuries. The nobelist Richard Feynman decades agoimagined this when called it: "a phenomenon which is impossible ... to explain in any classicalway, and which has in it the heart of quantum mechanics. In reality, it contains the only mysteryof quantum mechanics”. Feynman was writing about interference fringes appearing in thedouble-slit Young's arrangement when many simultaneously electrons were fired. "Many

“...There are only waves and,knowingly, wavesare superpositions of otherwaves."

"Field emission:

electrons are emitted from avery sharp tungsten tip (thinnerthan 1/1000 mm) when apotential (3 – 5) kV is appliedbetween the tip and a firstanode ring; this effect is knownas field emission"

Time = 1

simultaneous" means a high probability of interference fringes due to the superposition ofseveral electrons on the screen, something absolutely expected and normal.

But, when later, Young’s experiment was first time performed with individually fired electrons, itwas touched the surface of something much bigger than the wavelike properties of theelectromagnetic radiation.

It happened in 1989. A group at the Hitachi's Advanced Research Laboratory (at Tokyo,Japan) led by Akira Tonomura developed the first double-slit system allowing to observe thebuild-up of the fringe pattern with a very weak electron source: single-electrons fired on a one-by-one base toward a double slit. What results when firing single-electrons fired on a one-by-one base toward a double slit is unimaginable. The figure below shows a schematicrepresentation of the modifications that Tonomura made to a Transmission Electron Microscopeto develop his experimental setup. Electrons are emitted from a very sharp tungsten tip (thinnerthan 1/1000 mm) when a potential in the range (3 – 5) kV is applied between the tip and a firstanode ring; this effect is known as field emission. Assorted Optoelectronics within the modifiedelectron microscope attenuates and focus the electron beam. The hits are fine-detailed by thefour figures on right side.

Time = 2

Time = 3

Time = 4

Above: common sense is not enoughto imagine how these images couldbe truly existing. Thomas Young’sexperiment was first made with lightwaves two centuries ago. But, sinceone century it is observed that firingmassive particles like electrons orneutrons, on a one-by-onebase, creates the same wave likepattern. And same is true also firingmassive mesoscopic moleculescomposed by hundredths of atoms,on a one-by-one base: the samewave like pattern. Each objects firedafter the precedent hitted the screen,shows an interferential shape on thescreen meaning that alsomesoscopic bodies are, when closelylooked, waves. More, or electronshave now to be supposed havingtheir own brain, or there is only atheory capable to explain how canthey know what was the path chooseby each one of the electrons firedbefore. The only theory with the

Above: Tonomura's group schematic representation of their 1898 single-electron double-slitexperiment (image abridged by Prutchi, et al., 2012)

These show how, hit after hit, what in the start looks like mere noise, develope in the end awave like pattern. The bright spots begin to appear here and there at random positions: theseare electrons’ constructive wave packets, detected one by one and looking like particles. These electrons were accelerated to 50,000 V, and therefore the speed is ~40 % of the speedof the light, i. e., it is ~120,000 km/second. These electrons can go around the earth threetimes in a second. They pass through a one-meter-long electron microscope in 1/100 000 000of a second. The De Broglie wavelength for the accelerated electrons is λ = 0.0055 nm.

Interference fringes are produced only when two electrons pass through both sides of theelectron biprism simultaneously. If there were two electrons in the microscope at the sametime, such interference might happen. But this cannot occur, because there is no more thanone electron in the microscope at one time, since only ten electrons are emitted persecond. When a large number of electrons is accumulated, something like regular fringes beginto appear in the perpendicular direction shows. Clear interference fringes can be seen in thelast scene of the experiment after 20 minutes. It should also be noted that the fringes are madeup of bright spots, each of which records the detection of an electron. The final resultingpattern on the screen does not resembles at all any interferential, rather hints to a corpuscularcharacter of the objects. Although electrons were sent one by one, interference fringes couldbe observed. Interference fringes are expected only when electron waves pass through onboth sides of the electron biprism at the same time, but nothing other than this. Wheneverelectrons are observed, they are always detected as individual particles. When accumulated,however, interference fringes are formed. Please recall that at any one instant there was at mostone electron in the microscope. We remark that these figures are what is detected on thescreen after having been hitted by material particles, like molecules, atoms, neutrons, orelectrons. We are not speaking of objects since centuries considered wavelike, like the light

necessary explanatory power is theRelative State formulation ofQuantum Mechanics, also namedMany-Worlds Interpretation ofQuantum Mechanics (imagesabridged by Amelino-Camelia,Kowalski, 2005)

(photons). This confirms that, in the reality, no material particle exists at all, rather only waveswith different properties like energy, spin, etc.

The interpretational bifurcation reached in 1982 after Alain Aspect’s group experiment onEntanglement:

1. Bohm-De Broglie's interpretation explains it but only after paying the unacceptable priceto postulate that light (and, gravitational interaction) does not defines the limit speed forall causal correlations: it needs to introduce tachyions;

2. Copenhagen's interpretation of Quantum Mechanics, has no explanation for whatregistered during this experiment;

3. Everett’s Relative State formulation, since the start included exactly what is observed;

reproposed itself in 1989, this time with many more accumulated experimental evidences. The aspect of interference fringes, visibleabove on right side, develops itself always and also for individual particles, …also if the molecules, atoms, neutrons, protons or electronsare fired after the precedently fired particle yet hit the screen.

Above: 61 years before it was observed, the Schroedinger equation of 1927 prefetched the result of the firing of an electrontoward the slits. Wave packets are superpositions of discrete or infinite amounts of superimposed waves. The animation

shows the entire process of diffraction of a wave packet in the multitude of its components, as seen by the double-slit zenithalpoint, perpendicular over the electrons' path

The experiment had been repeated with material bodies of progressively increasing size and mass: we are no more in the domain ofparticles, rather inthe mesoscopic scale close to human direct unaided sight. Also mesoscopic macromolecules, including severalhundredths of atoms appearing like a small grain of dust well visible by common microscopes were tested, without any change in thefinal result. There are only waves and, knowingly, waves are superpositions of other waves. More, or neutrons have now to besupposed having a brain, because it seems that they know what was the path choose by each one of the neutrons fired before.

On left side: Clifford-torus is atetradimensional object of which weare here forcedly seeing a projection. We have developed less than 100billions of neurons: not enough toperceive events which are happeningon an arena whose spatialdimensionality is, as a minimum, 4.What we see in the video on side, isnever what really the Clifford-torus isand look like as seen by a tetradimensional point of view we’ll neverhave. As a consequence, the detailsof the branching superpositions ofstates, corresponding toMeasurements and looking likebifurcations, can be finely followedbut only mathematically

Physics has since 1957 a unique theory with the explanatory power for the images on right sideand, what is more important, it is not an ad-hoc one born to explain Tomomuraexperiment, because it was conceived 31 years before Tonomura's result. Thisinterpretation (“The Many-World Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics”) in brief explains that allof the objects are waves and that they all are superimposed and part of a last grandsuperposition. Thomas Young’s experiment with matter had been extensively repeated on aworldwide base after 1989, reconfirming the veridicity of the interference fringes on side. Todaythey exists also cheap and valuable Optoelectronics plus software kits, to be connected to acomputer thus allowing to whoever to witness and register single-electrons interferences in thetwo-slit configuration.

2. Double-slit with airOn the opposite, a decoherent set of histories is one for which the quantum mechanicalinterference between individual histories is small enough to guarantee an appropriate set ofprobability sum rules, what represented by the bell-shaped distribution observed above, onright side. It is the continous measurement of an object by all other objects, in our industrialEnvironment mainly molecules of that mix of O, N, He, CO2 we name air, under thepermanent bath of light, the reason why we do not see simultaneous alternative TriggeredEvents. In other terms, the Environment induces a super selection, separating in two or moresubspaces the (Hilbert) space where objects really exist. What above, around one century agoinduced what was then the mainstream interpretation of Quantum Mechanics (Copenhagen’sschool) to establish a Wave-Particle Duality which further experiments, improved technologiesand theories, showed a mere illusion.

Since decades it is clear that is Decoherence what lets us perceive in a unique status for whatis superposition of states and that, all is:

waves;branching superpositions of waves.

On left side: evolution of the coherenthistory of the wave function Ψ. Intwobranches Ψ(1) and Ψ(2), separatelyevolved in five branches Ψ(1,1), Ψ(1,2), Ψ(2,1), Ψ(2,2) and Ψ(2,2), evolving in further seventeenbranches. Such scenario is citedtoday in the scientific literature veryfrequently. An amount oftechnological facts encounters thereits only explanation (figure abridgedby Zurek, Riedel, Zwolak, 2013)

“Why do we only experience individualsharp superpositions, single bowlingballs, rather than multitudes ?”.

Because all others get damped out bydecoherence, before we have the timeto observe them”

Decoherence speedImagine a physical object as heavy as a Bowling Ball in an Environment in standard conditionsof temperature, air pressure and humidity. It is a superposition of a multitude of possiblecorrelations between its elementary components (quarks, gluons, leptons, etc.) and all of theothers building up what we name Environment. Its even and odd components have equalclassical components but opposite quantum interferences. The Laboratoire Kastler Brossel ofthe French CNRS processed such an object subtracting their Wigner functions, then isolatingthe interference feature displaying their quantumness. The result is the evolution of this signalover 50 ms, exhibiting a fast decay after only a few milliseconds due to Decoherence, of theoriginal pure interference pattern which represented the physical object.

On left side: magnesiumfluoride multicoating anti reflectivetreatment, well visible by its pinkcolour in this camera, is a practicalexample of quantum interference. Here, destructive interference isused to increase the Signal-to-Noiserelation of the Information containedin the image

Below: bowling balls decohere in atime extremely short, explaining oursensation of their unique existence ina definite place

On left side: the classic or non-classic behaviour of the objects asan effect of Decoherence by the

How fast Decoherence happens is known since two decades. In the Table below, showing theDecoherence Rates (or, Localization Rates), expressed in units of m s are represented threecases representative of objects of micro-, meso- and macroscopic scales:

an electron, not binded to any atom;a dust particle, at the limit of unaided eyes visibility;a bowling ball.

We’ll be now more precise about how our operative ambientconditions [thermal background temperature ~ 300 K (~27 ºC) in air at a pressure of 1 atmosphere], imply extremelyhigh localization rates for an object of the size of a bowlingball, but fourteen orders of magnitude smaller for an objectas small as an electron. The effect of air, or any othersurrounding substance, and black-body radiation from thesurrounding is strongly temperature dependent

(typically ∝T ), and can hence be reduced by nine orders ofmagnitude by working at liquid Helium temperatures or, in asmaller extent, taking profit of a Peltier-effect cell. Exactlythe strategy followed when looking for maximumperformances of Optoelectronics’ devices, first of all: theCCD-sensors. Comparing these results with conditions ofminimised scattering, like the exposure of these objects tothe cold ambient with the only cosmic background radiation,at a temperature of ~ 3 K (~ -273 ºC), the macroscopicbowling ball decoheres in a time 10 shorter than what weexperience.

-2 -1

5

28

surronding environment. Tabularvalues show the Localization Rate,expressed in units of cm-2 s-1, forthe center-of-mass of three differentobjects, in order of decreasingstrength. Localization Ratemeasures how fast interference inbetween different positionsdisappears for distances smallerthan the wavelength of the scatteredobjects. Here shown the localizationrates for 3 cases: a quark (electron)not binded to any atom, a dustparticle and a bowling ball. Ouroperative ambient conditions are metat a thermal background temperature~ 300 K (~ 27 C) in air at a pressure of1 atm, implying extremely highlocalization rates for an object of thesize of a bowling ball, but fourteenorders of magnitude smaller for anobject as small as an electron (tableabridged by Tegmark, 1993)

These studies allowed to answer the main question arising after 1957:

“Why do we only experience individual sharp superpositions, single bowling balls, rather thanmultitudes ?”.

…..because all of the others get damped out by Decoherence, before we have the time toobserve them.

Decoherence limitsDecoherence is a process with the same fundamental limits seen in the start of this page, withrespect to the volumes of space causally connected with the Trigger Events, a subject we’lldeepen in the following.

Refer to the figure below, where:

blue coloured, 3-D volume (encoded in 2-D for graphic rendering) of space hosting theenvironmental factors E (e.g. air, thermal photons) and the quantum system S;red coloured, 3-D volume causally disconnected;M, Trigger Event;S, quantum system interacting (“measured”) by the Trigger;A, macroscopic measurement instrument, e.g. a Trigger photosensor.

The majority of the space is always causally disconnected. We are indicating as a black colourbold inclined line, the worldline of the macroscopic measurement instrument A (the Trigger). Inclined with respect to the Time axe, to manifest the fact that the instrument is over a noninertial platform.

Above: all measurement systems,Bottling Controls and Machinery, arethemselves superpositions of waveslike the photon wave packetdepicted above. Particles do notexist at all and the reason we are stillnaming waves in that way, is merecustom

On left side: the measurement of aphysical property by a macroscopicinstrument, e.g. by an inspection in aBottling Control, is subject toadditional limits. Only the properties

What precedes has an interesting implication: the macroscopic measurement device A (theTrigger, in our case) continues to remain in superposition of statuses, not decohered, for allwhat is so far to result causally disconnected. Say, all what in the figure below lies in the spaceand is shown in red colour. The reduced volume that we consider Environment of a Food andBeverage Bottling Line, assures that all triggerings and measurements are always derived byinteractions with decohered states. As visible by the figure below, this assumption is a fictionuseful to simplify an extremely complex relation. As all fictions, it cannot provide definitivesolutions nor improvements on hard-to-tackle technical issues.

This subject is reminiscent of the Problem Solving method searching for the root cause of aproblem centered on the point where the effects are felt. A strategy commonly followed whenan evident cause cannot be encountered in the space-time volume we choose to considerthe connected Environment.

In these cases, we are searching for all of the thinkable cause-effect relations:

in space volumes progressively increased;going backward in time.

The answer of modern Physics to this point is dual, stating that all:

subsystems are in a superposition of statuses, as seen by all of the other subsytems,causally disconnected because too far;what lies into the future lightcone of the measurement Event M is related to M and givesrise to effects S + A conditioned by the Environment E.

of objects S and of the environmentE into the causally connected (bluecolour) volume of space, part of thefuture lightcone of the Event M (theMeasurement), shall be decohered. This, means that the macroscopicmeasurement device A continues toremain in a super position of statusesfor all what lies in the causallydisconnected - red coloured -space (image adapted by L.Susskind, R. Bousso, 2012)

On right side: photons are superpositions of wave packets of something, a fundamentalconcept (an axiom) we'll name here energy without even to try to explain its nature. The wellknown diffraction of white light in a spectrum, corresponds to a macroscopic observation ofa reality whose arena lies in the microscale. Something we are capable to perceive directlyonly because effect of the participation of a multitude of photons

. . .

.

. .

. . . .

. PRICE LIST REFERENCES

SERVICES CONTACT MULTIMEDIA TECHNOLOGIES DEVELOPER TERMS .

Privacy Policy